1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to the aggregation and dissemination of commerce information over a network, and, more particularly, to a method and apparatus for facilitating the processing of commercial transactions over a network.
2. Description of the Related Art
In the stream of commerce, numerous commercial transactions occur between multiple parties to enable a manufacturer to provide a product to an end user, typically referred to as a customer. Historically, many, if not all of the aforementioned commercial transactions were insular and discrete, with respect to the other commercial transactions in the stream of commerce. Each involved business traditions, customs and relationships uniquely tailored to the commercial transaction at hand.
An example of such traditions, customs and relationships is what is known commercially as the distribution channel, or more simply, the channel. The channel is the set of entities, at its furthest extent, that starts with component parts suppliers and terminates with a commercial product's end user. In between are commercial entities such as original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), distributors, resellers (e.g., value-added resellers (VARs)) and retail sales organizations (often referred to as storefronts). Distribution channels have formed in industries such as the computer industry, for example.
From a commercial standpoint, there are a number of efficiencies enjoyed by the various channel entities that spring from both their up-channel and down-channel relationships. These efficiencies are due, in part, to the aggregation that occurs (again, both up-channel and down-channel). Fan-out in the down-channel direction increases the volume of purchasing up-channel for those entities inside the channel. Conversely, as noted, fan-in in the up-channel direction allows up-channel entities to aggregate orders to achieve advantages of scale (e.g., volume purchasing discounts). An example of down-channel relationships (from a small number of producers to a large number of consumers) is the sale of goods from a distributor to a reseller. In such situations, the producers enjoy volume sales (and so may purchase in volume to get volume discounts, but must have the infrastructure to handle such volume), while the consumers avoid the need to purchase in volume (but must pay higher prices as a cost of buying relatively small quantities). A more complete example of such a scenario is sales by an OEM to a distributor that sells to multiple resellers, each of which, in turn, sell to a much larger number of storefronts, who in turn sell to an even larger number of end users.
Typically, each level of the channel deals mainly with the level immediately above or below (e.g., distributors normally only deal with resellers, requiring a federal employer ID number, state sales tax number, proof of incorporation and the like; distributors normally will not deal with end-users; and so on). Of late, however, this distinction has become blurred on occasion (e.g., distributors building products to the specifications of a reseller's customers; OEMs that sell in the channel, but also direct; and so on). However, a common process in channel relationships, and indeed in business relationships in general, is the process of aggregating and analyzing offers for sale of products (or services or the like) by a party wishing to purchase such products (or services or the like). Such a process is common in end-user/reseller, reseller/distributor, government entity/reseller, and other such relationships. One example is the request for quotation (RFQ) process. As used herein, the term “RFQ” is understood to include, but not be limited to, requests for quote, request for services (RFS), request for information (RFI), request for proposal (RFP) and the like, and is not to be limited to a legal understanding of such terms.
Presently, the process of issuing an RFQ, bidding on the RFQ and awarding a contract based on a winning bid is a cumbersome and awkward affair. For example, a computer reseller (and distributor) must often perform many of the steps of the RFQ process manually. This includes reviewing product descriptions in distributor catalogs, reviewing current distributor relationships (depending on the products desired), calling or faxing requests for quotation to the selected distributors, contacting the distributors to ensure the quotation will be provided in a timely manner, the distributor's having to send or fax their quotation, ensuring all selected distributors have responded (or have elected not to respond), physically aggregating and organizing all the bids, comparing the bids and selecting the winning bid (even though the bids may not exactly reflect the items requested, and even though no information regarding the substituted items is available to the reseller). These hurdles, and more, await the unwary reseller who wishes to fill a customer's order while maximizing (or even achieving) profitability. Moreover, the process does not even take into consideration the services not provided by the reseller that the customer may desire (e.g., maintenance, customer support, extended warranty and the like).
Thus, inefficiencies exist in the traditional process of requesting quotations, both in terms of the time and resources involved, and so such a process is difficult to manage. For example, merchants (e.g., distributors) who would otherwise sell to the given buyers (e.g., resellers) might be unknown to those buyers, as small distributors (regional or otherwise) are often unknown to resellers in other areas. This can translate to the affected merchants never being considered for (i.e., notified of) an RFQ. Moreover, an RFQ process with the aforementioned infirmities can also encounter late or misdirected RFQs and/or responses. If such RFQs/responses are not lost, their lateness can cause the award to take place much later than need be (e.g., waiting for a bid from a distributor that is particularly desirable because of pricing, previous relationship or other such reasons). Conversely, the reseller may have already received bids from the selected distributors, but must hold bidding open (i.e., wait until the bidding period has elapsed) in order to allow the respondents to change their bids, should one or more of them so desire.
Such a manual RFQ process is also hard to manage. Several problems present themselves. As noted, there may be distributors the reseller would like to have bid on the given RFQ. Making a determination as to which distributors are preferable is also difficult, and will often result in the reseller issuing the RFQ to all distributors with whom the reseller has relationships. Further, analyzing quotations is difficult, particularly when the responses received contain substitutions, additions and/or deletions, or when the quotations are from different channel entities (e.g., OEMs and distributors) that offer different pricing structures, service, capabilities, and the like. Moreover, the management of channel relationships and the enforcement of channel agreements (e.g., agreements that avoid OEMs selling direct to end-users when they're also selling to distributors (for sale to resellers, and ultimately end-users)) is also problematic. The traditions and customs that have evolved over many years of dealings between merchants in the ordinary course of business have thus grown to a point that the process has become unwieldy and, in some cases, unusable.
Moreover, such a manual RFQ process is also deficient due to its incompleteness. A reseller will often have a number of varied needs with regard to the purchase of a given product (e.g., a computer system). The reseller will likely need not only the given product, but will also have requirements for accessories not offered by the original merchant, product support, financing, installation, maintenance, administration and the like. In fact, the reseller may fail to recognize one or more of these needs, and be forced to secure such services at a later date.
Further, because of the wide array of products and service that may require procurement, the problems facing such a procurement process are also greatly increased. For example, in such a scenario, instead of having to send out an RFQ to one group, the reseller must send out separate RFQs, each directed to a given need (accessories, installation and so on), to a group of merchants providing products, services or the like that meet such a need. This turns an otherwise awkward process into a completely unmanageable one.